Re: What ever happened to Ada

["Tom Griest" <griest@cs.yale.edu>]

Noam Kloos <noam@3wis.nl> wrote in article <328848A2.53FC9822@3wis.nl>...
> Was: Ada on old and Simple systems
> 
> What happened to the original philosphy of Ada usage?
> I asked a quite general question how to use Ada programs on 8088
> and 80286 machines.
> I received response in several ways like why don't I buy a 80386 or an
> offer to buy an old Ada compiler for 8088 machines.
> 
> It is just that i was testdriving the Gnat for Windows95 the first time
> and simply compiled the hello.adb. Then tried to run the executable on
> an old XT 8088 machine and got the message : 'this program cannot be run
> in MSDOS mode'.
> This seems to me a bit absurd and analog to over bureaucracy.

When you have something called: "Gnat for Windows95", why do you
think that it should generate code for a platform that cannot
run Win95?  It is not a cross compiler after all.
 
What would really be absurd is to have a Pentium Pro processor that
could not address over 640K of memory, which would be the limitation
if your restricted the GNAT/Win32 code generation to the programming
model of IBM PC/XT.  There is no reason why you couldn't have a
GNAT cross-compiler target the PC/XT... except economics.  The fact
of the matter is that these machines are beyond their useful life.
Except for the possible special case (like using them as a terminal)
they usually cost more to operate (if you include the value of the 
operator's time) than it takes to upgrade them.

What IS reasonable is to take an OLD Ada compiler and be able to
compile the SAME PROGRAM using the OLD compiler for the OLD PC/XT
and a new compiler for the new Win95.  This can be done, and it seems
that this is all that is needed to satisfy your "dream" of Ada.

-Tom